The Calgary Flames should have called Bill Peters' words racist. They didn't.
The first step to combating racism is to admit that it exists. The Flames couldn't even do that.
The first step to combating racism is to admit that it exists. In his remarks to the media on Friday afternoon, Calgary Flames general manager Brad Treliving couldn’t even do that.
Treliving addressed reporters to confirm the resignation of head coach Bill Peters, who had been accused of using the n-word on several occasions by former NHL player Akim Aliu while both were with the AHL Rockford IceHogs 10 years ago. Peters’ departure from the team was not a surprise, considering he admitted to using the slur, though stopped short of acknowledging he had directed it at Aliu. The racial accusations against Peters were also followed up by accusations of physical abuse from former Carolina Hurricanes player Michal Jordan that Peters is accused of having committed while he was the head coach.
In addressing the incident, Treliving showed just how far the Flames were willing to go in accepting responsibility for the incident and helping combat the toxic culture surrounding hockey.
Sadly, the answer is not very far at all.
Treliving’s press conference was an all too real and depressing reminder of hockey’s culture of silence when it comes to openly addressing instances of abuse and racism. There’s no defending or talking around the use of the n-word, a vile and despicable utterance meant to strip away a person’s humanity, yet that’s exactly what Treliving did.
Instead of forcefully condemning Peters words and actions, Treliving stuck to an all to familiar script and missed a vital opportunity to lead the way in a difficult situation. In his remarks, Treliving condemned Peters’ use of the slur but when asked if he would categorize the incident as racist, Treliving waffled.
“I think I said ‘repulsive’ at the time,” Treliving responded. “I think I’ve categorized what we feel of the issue.”
Treliving words are woefully inadequate. If the Flames, as an organization, aren’t able to see the use of the n-word by a coach as an act of racism, there’s little hope of them being able to call it out elsewhere.
When asked if what would have happened if Peters hadn’t resigned, Treliving simply said that he didn’t want to get into “hypotheticals.”
The organizations inability to frankly call out a racist act, and state, unequivocally, that it is has no place in the Flames organization and in all of hockey, is a massive moral failure.
Whether the team has been pushed to use that language for legal considerations, or simply feels uncomfortable labeling racist language as such, it’s clear the Flames have no intention of probing any further into the incident or combating a culture that allows it to perpetuate.
As with Peters apology letter, Treliving’s remarks also centered the Flames as the victims in this entire incident, rather than the player who was actually discriminated against.
“I pray that no one else has to go through this.” Treliving said. He was speaking about the team and himself, not the players who suffered racial and physical abuse.
Institutional and structural racism work to convince you that racism doesn’t actually exist. By failing to call Peters actions what they were, the Flames committed to propping up that system of inequality.
A couple of days ago, I wondered how close hockey and the toxic culture that surrounds it were to meaningful change. After Treliving’s comments, it seems as far away as ever.